Jump to content



Shadow Man


  • Please log in to reply
178 replies to this topic

#121 Snowlord

Snowlord

    Ghoststudy's Official Photo Expert

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,219 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Brunswick, Canada
  • Interests:Photography ... Chess ... Nature ... Astronomy ... Kicking Butt...stuff like that.

Posted 22 October 2009 - 10:41 AM

QUOTE(RJuarez @ Oct 22 2009, 03:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
...  I would love for you to examine the original image closely ...


Of course I will. But just call me an enthusiastic amateur.


#122 Snowlord

Snowlord

    Ghoststudy's Official Photo Expert

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,219 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Brunswick, Canada
  • Interests:Photography ... Chess ... Nature ... Astronomy ... Kicking Butt...stuff like that.

Posted 22 October 2009 - 11:01 AM

I've taken a quick look at the original image, and there is a bit more detail in it than in some of the others posted here. I see a person standing there in a bathrobe, with pajama clad legs below the bottom line of the bath robe. You can see the line of the pajamas on the leg. I see the blankets turned down on the bed which indicates to me someone getting ready to go to bed.

To me ... in my opinion ... this is a real picture of someone in the room, in a bathrobe and pajamas, getting ready to go to bed. It looks strange because of the slow shutter speed used causing some obscuration of the subject. I don't want to insult anyone's integrity by saying this is a picture of a real person ... but that is what I personally see in the picture.












.

#123 Guest_Mantook_*

Guest_Mantook_*
  • Guests

Posted 22 October 2009 - 11:10 AM

lol... this has to be fake.

#124 Caniswalensis

Caniswalensis

    Spongebob Swearpants

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,784 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The bleak, cold world of disbelief
  • Interests:History & the study of anything paranormal.

Posted 22 October 2009 - 11:18 AM

QUOTE(Snowlord @ Oct 22 2009, 02:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I don't want to insult anyone's integrity by saying this is a picture of a real person ... but that is what I personally see in the picture.

I do not believe that your opinion neccesarily insults the integrity of Mr. Juarez, whom I am completely prepared to take him at his word when he says no trickery is involved here.

I believe the key is that there was a span of months before the strange image was noticed.  That is plenty of time in which anyone could forget the actual subject of the picture, and make an honest mistake about who was in frame when the photo was taken.

Regards, Canis

#125 czoom

czoom

    Ectoplasm

  • GS Member
  • Pip
  • 125 posts

Posted 22 October 2009 - 11:21 AM

This is the shadow I used to see in my dreams when I lived at my parents house. Same hat and everything. It's a demon!!!



#126 RJuarez

RJuarez

    Orb

  • GS Member
  • 43 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 22 October 2009 - 11:44 AM

QUOTE(Snowlord @ Oct 22 2009, 12:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I've taken a quick look at the original image, and there is a bit more detail in it than in some of the others posted here. I see a person standing there in a bathrobe, with pajama clad legs below the bottom line of the bath robe. You can see the line of the pajamas on the leg. I see the blankets turned down on the bed which indicates to me someone getting ready to go to bed.

To me ... in my opinion ... this is a real picture of someone in the room, in a bathrobe and pajamas, getting ready to go to bed. It looks strange because of the slow shutter speed used causing some obscuration of the subject. I don't want to insult anyone's integrity by saying this is a picture of a real person ... but that is what I personally see in the picture.
.


Just curious, is it your opinion then that the photo is real but of my wife captured in a shadow in the room?  Do you see any evidence of layering or tampering or whatever the correct term is?  This is an authentic capture of something that is not my wife or daughter.  And the blankets are pulled back because I went in ahead of my wife and daughter to set the bed. My daughter was asleep in our car just outside the door and I told my wife to remain in the car with her just in case she woke up.  The room looked creepy and that's why I took the pic.  I did not feel anything, no presence of a spirit.  

The fact my wife and daughter stayed outside makes it impossible for me to have captured one of them in this image.  I have no other logical explanation than to say it is paranormal.  



#127 RJuarez

RJuarez

    Orb

  • GS Member
  • 43 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 22 October 2009 - 11:50 AM

QUOTE(CaniswalensisGStudy @ Oct 22 2009, 12:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I do not believe that your opinion neccesarily insults the integrity of Mr. Juarez, whom I am completely prepared to take him at his word when he says no trickery is involved here.

I believe the key is that there was a span of months before the strange image was noticed.  That is plenty of time in which anyone could forget the actual subject of the picture, and make an honest mistake about who was in frame when the photo was taken.

Regards, Canis



The time is actually not that big of a deal.  We stayed one night and I remembered it clearly.  We were in town for Hot August Nights in Reno.  The rooms were expensive so we shopped around and found the Comstock Lodge in Virginia City for like $50 a night.  I know for a fact my daughter was asleep and my wife stayed in the car with her when I went in.  I don't know what else the image could be.  



#128 Snowlord

Snowlord

    Ghoststudy's Official Photo Expert

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,219 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Brunswick, Canada
  • Interests:Photography ... Chess ... Nature ... Astronomy ... Kicking Butt...stuff like that.

Posted 22 October 2009 - 12:08 PM

QUOTE(RJuarez @ Oct 22 2009, 04:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
... Just curious, is it your opinion then that the photo is real but of my wife captured in a shadow in the room? ...  Do you see any evidence of layering or tampering or whatever the correct term is? ...


My expertise in this ghost photography field is mainly with manipulating the environment ( and the camera ) in a way to create real photographs that look like commonly posted paranormal images. In this way I try to show that these types of pictures don't "have" to be paranormal, but could have mundane explanations. I'm not an expert with Photoshop or other editing programs, and I don't have the skill and knowledge ( and software ) to definitively answer whether this photo was possibly manipulated in that way or not. But I don't think it needed to be to get this effect.

Just from what I can see in this new and better image, and from my experience in creating images like this, my opinion is that it is a real person standing there under the conditions that I mentioned above.  Beyond that I can't comment on the other circumstances of the image being made as I was not there to see for myself.

Edited by Snowlord, 22 October 2009 - 12:09 PM.


#129 RJuarez

RJuarez

    Orb

  • GS Member
  • 43 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 22 October 2009 - 12:08 PM

It has been said numerous times about credibility of the photographer and do you believe me.  Well I have a bit of proof or evidence to back up my story.  I took about 5 images of the room that night, all but these 2 were deleted.  If I had known what I captured I would never have done that.  They were just not pics worth saving in my opinion at the time.  This pic is one of the others I took and saved.  If you compare it to the one with the shadow man capture, you will see where the pink blanket and pillow are now missing.  The reason is I went in ahead of my wife and daughter to set the bed for them.  I removed the blanket and pillow and placed it on the bed.  Before walking back outside I snapped another pic or 2.  

I think this pic adds a little bit credibility to my story.  Here is it also full size, untouched Image Number 2

#130 Caniswalensis

Caniswalensis

    Spongebob Swearpants

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,784 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The bleak, cold world of disbelief
  • Interests:History & the study of anything paranormal.

Posted 22 October 2009 - 12:18 PM

QUOTE(Mantook @ Oct 22 2009, 02:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
lol... this has to be fake.

I would not describe this photo as "fake" myself.

While I do not generally accept ghost photos as being real, I do not think deliberate hoaxing or faking is a very common explanation for them either.  I believe the vast majority of photos we see are the result of people honestly searching for answers.

I would say that it probably has a natural explanation, but from what I have seen here, RJuarez has not doctored this photo, and honestly believes it is supernatural.

Discussing the photo is one thing, but I feel we should be careful not to call the honesty of our members into question without a very good reason.

Regards, Canis

#131 BlueAngel

BlueAngel

    Disembodied Voice

  • Guests
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,945 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:United States
  • Interests:Interested in the paranormal, and I am proud I just published my first book regarding my haunting.

Posted 22 October 2009 - 12:25 PM

I guess I want to ask, why so many people are basically calling the OP a liar or confused about what he got in the photos? Did it ever occur to you that this could indeed be an entity in that room? For one year people have tried to re-create it, and I dont see in their's what I see in OP's. I have only seen a handful of true apparitions, and IMO this is one. I dont see manipulation or mistakes here, this is clearly something that does not belong in that room. How are we ever going to move ahead if every single picture is dismissed due to "its a natural occurrance." How can that be natural? It isnt. As far as Im concerned this is a great catch, and most of them are captured by mistake, from my standpoint. Picture 562.gif
YOU CANT SCARE ME, I HAVE KIDS

#132 Snowlord

Snowlord

    Ghoststudy's Official Photo Expert

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,219 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Brunswick, Canada
  • Interests:Photography ... Chess ... Nature ... Astronomy ... Kicking Butt...stuff like that.

Posted 22 October 2009 - 12:28 PM

I can't honestly say that a second picture, taken 27 seconds later showing a blanket and pillow moved, does much to support your story in my view.

#133 The_Dead_Shall_Rise_Again

The_Dead_Shall_Rise_Again

    Ghostlight

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 October 2009 - 12:35 PM

in the lightened version that snowlord posted,to me,it looks like someone in pajamas who just got out of bed and has their leg bent which looks like they might be putting a slipper/shoe on.thats what it looks like to me.also with the bed cover being pulled down,it indicates,to me,that someone just got out of bed.

or maybe its the opposite,someone taking their slippers off before hopping into the bed.


again,just my opinion,of what i see.



Edited by DeadmanWalking74, 22 October 2009 - 12:37 PM.


#134 RJuarez

RJuarez

    Orb

  • GS Member
  • 43 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 22 October 2009 - 12:36 PM

QUOTE(Snowlord @ Oct 22 2009, 01:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I can't honestly say that a second picture, taken 27 seconds later showing a blanket and pillow moved, does much to support your story in my view.


Well if I claim I went in ahead to set the bed for my wife and daughter, the pic at least shows a girls pink blanket on the dresser and power puff girls pillow on the chair.  I snapped off the pic, went over grabbed the pillow and blanket, threw it on the bed for my daughter.  It shows a sequence of events that kind of back up my story.  I then went outside and carried my daughter in and laid her on the bed.  

I was alone in the room.  No question about that.

#135 Snowlord

Snowlord

    Ghoststudy's Official Photo Expert

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,219 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Brunswick, Canada
  • Interests:Photography ... Chess ... Nature ... Astronomy ... Kicking Butt...stuff like that.

Posted 22 October 2009 - 12:40 PM

QUOTE(BlueAngel @ Oct 22 2009, 05:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I guess I want to ask, why so many people are basically calling the OP a liar or confused about what he got in the photos? Did it ever occur to you that this could indeed be an entity in that room? For one year people have tried to re-create it, and I dont see in their's what I see in OP's. I have only seen a handful of true apparitions, and IMO this is one. I dont see manipulation or mistakes here, this is clearly something that does not belong in that room. How are we ever going to move ahead if every single picture is dismissed due to "its a natural occurrance." How can that be natural? It isnt. As far as Im concerned this is a great catch, and most of them are captured by mistake, from my standpoint. Picture 562.gif



Of course it's possible that this is a real catch, just not very likely due to probabilities. But still possible.

You may not see in our re-creations what you see in the original ... but we didn't have the same camera, same room, same light, and so on. This is a big important thing when doing re-creations. All we can do is show that the "effect" can be re-created, not the exact same picture.

I also disagree that this is "clearly" something that doesn't belong in the room. All we have is the word of the poster to support that. I think this does look like something that belongs in the room ... a person in pajamas and a bathrobe. There is nothing in the image itself that suggests anything else.

To answer your final question ... no, we can't move ahead based on photography. It's just not reliable enough and it's not a good source of information all on it's own. And there is no reason that they can't all be natural.  Just not wanting them to be is not a reasonable reason. So yes ... I think all ghost photography should be deeply questioned, which is what we are doing here.


.




#136 Caniswalensis

Caniswalensis

    Spongebob Swearpants

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,784 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The bleak, cold world of disbelief
  • Interests:History & the study of anything paranormal.

Posted 22 October 2009 - 01:13 PM

QUOTE(BlueAngel @ Oct 22 2009, 03:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Did it ever occur to you that this could indeed be an entity in that room?



Of course, but holding that idea as possible is a far cry from accepting it as fact.

Just because a photo shows something we do not understand or can not explain, that does not mean it is supernatural.  Even if all the suggestions of natural explanations are shown to be wrong, it does not prove this to be supernatural.  More importantly, it does not give us one real bit of knowledge about the nature of what we are looking at.

Let's go out on a limb and assume that this is supernatural for a minute.  (a very big assumption, BTW) So, there is no natural explanation, and it is supernatural.  So, what is it?  How do we tell?  You say it is a ghost?  I say you are guessing.  I guess alien.  Can you prove me wrong?  Nope.  Because we are both making guesses and there is no way to test them.  One guess is as good as the other.

But, you have a story about the place being haunted, and that makes your ghost guess better than my alien guess.  Wrong; the story and the photo are not connected in any observable way.  If you connect them, you are making an assumption. It is tempting to connect them, but they are two seperate things.

Lets say I have a friend who was shot in a theater.  I assume it was John Wilkes Booth pulling the trigger, because I heard that he is famous for shooting people in theaters.  Is that logical?  No, in fact it is ridiculous.  Far more so than the subject at hand, but the exageration helps to illustrate the point.  It is not safe to make such assumptions.  Even when they seem perfectly logical, we can easily decieve ourselves by assuming connections where they can not be demonstrated.

It is a compellingly interesting photo, none the less.

Regards, Canis

#137 Caniswalensis

Caniswalensis

    Spongebob Swearpants

  • GS Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,784 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The bleak, cold world of disbelief
  • Interests:History & the study of anything paranormal.

Posted 22 October 2009 - 01:22 PM

QUOTE(RJuarez @ Oct 22 2009, 03:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well if I claim I went in ahead to set the bed for my wife and daughter, the pic at least shows a girls pink blanket on the dresser and power puff girls pillow on the chair.  I snapped off the pic, went over grabbed the pillow and blanket, threw it on the bed for my daughter.  It shows a sequence of events that kind of back up my story.  I then went outside and carried my daughter in and laid her on the bed.  

I was alone in the room.  No question about that.


Hi RJuarez,

I have to commend you on how patient you are with all this questioning, and thank you for being willing to discuss the photo in such detail.

Do you think there is the remotest possibility that you are remembering the sequence of events incorrectly?  

I confess it seems odd to me that someone would pause to take pictures, when they have a sleepy little girl in the car outside.  I am just wondering out loud.  I know that we do often do things that seem odd in retrospect, so please do not take offense at the suggestion.  

I also wonder if there could have been a second series of photos taken, while your wife was in the room.  it just seems so easy to forget or muddle up such trivial details.  I am going by my own experience, though. I often forget such things.  You may be different.

Regards, Canis

#138 Tyler

Tyler

    Orb

  • GS Member
  • 37 posts

Posted 22 October 2009 - 03:11 PM

I'm having to go with SnowLord on this one.

After re analyzing the picture, it really could easily be fabricated.

I'm not calling the poster a liar by any means, but regardless, I still have to come from a skeptical position. If it's real, that's great. If it's not (which honestly I think) than that's a bummer.

Either way, don't get discouraged, it's defiantly a nice find, but for me, there are just SO many things that could be what this 'ghost' is.

#139 RJuarez

RJuarez

    Orb

  • GS Member
  • 43 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 23 October 2009 - 09:09 AM

QUOTE(CaniswalensisGStudy @ Oct 22 2009, 02:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Hi RJuarez,

I have to commend you on how patient you are with all this questioning, and thank you for being willing to discuss the photo in such detail.

Do you think there is the remotest possibility that you are remembering the sequence of events incorrectly?  

I confess it seems odd to me that someone would pause to take pictures, when they have a sleepy little girl in the car outside.  I am just wondering out loud.  I know that we do often do things that seem odd in retrospect, so please do not take offense at the suggestion.  

I also wonder if there could have been a second series of photos taken, while your wife was in the room.  it just seems so easy to forget or muddle up such trivial details.  I am going by my own experience, though. I often forget such things.  You may be different.

Regards, Canis


I don't mind answering questions.  I enjoy the dialogue.  My daughter was not sleepy, she was asleep, out cold.  We only stayed one night, so it is very easy to recall the events of that night.  In fact I can tell you more about the night leading up. It's all irrelevant but...  Brew Brothers at the El Dorado casino for dinner, then off to the Circus Circus casino for my daughter, gas at the 711, and then I popped in a cd of alice in chains for the ride back to Virginia City.  We arrived at our room and I went in alone.  

I took pics because the room looked creepy.  I wanted to capture it.  I know it's tough to think I may have captured an authentic shadow person but I feel I did.  

It clearly looks like a human.  What else could it be. I did not see it, what was captured was not visible to the human eye.  Snowlord and I have debated it and is now up to the individual reader to make their own assumptions what it could be.  

If it were a fake I would not be defending it like this.  I have not altered it at all which makes it easy for me to defend with confidence.

I almost feel a responsibility to defend this image.  



#140 RJuarez

RJuarez

    Orb

  • GS Member
  • 43 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 23 October 2009 - 09:18 AM

QUOTE(Snowlord @ Oct 22 2009, 01:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Of course it's possible that this is a real catch, just not very likely due to probabilities. But still possible.


Snowlord, if you have a slight leaning towards this might be a real catch, you will need to think twice about the noises you hear late at night!  lol





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users